Sound intensity as a function of distance from source

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the intensity of a sound wave when the frequency is changed and the displacement is doubled. The initial intensity is given as 0.388 W/m^2 at 1.24 kHz, and the user is confused about the calculation when the frequency is stated as 2.64 kHz. Clarifications indicate that doubling both the amplitude and frequency should increase the intensity by a factor of 16, not 4. The importance of correctly interpreting the frequency change is emphasized, as it directly affects the calculations. Accurate application of the intensity formula is crucial for obtaining the correct result.
glasshut137
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement

THe intensity of a sound wave at a fixed distance from a speaker vibrating at 1.24 kHz is .388 W/m^2.
Calculate the intensity if the frequency is reduced to 2.64 kHz and the displacement is doubled.

used I=.5p(w^2)(A^2)v for the initial and the new intensity. I ended up with
4I0(f/f0)^2=I plugging in the numbers didn't get me the right answwer. can someone tell me what I am doing wrong. thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
glasshut137 said:

Homework Statement

THe intensity of a sound wave at a fixed distance from a speaker vibrating at 1.24 kHz is .388 W/m^2.
Calculate the intensity if the frequency is reduced to 2.64 kHz and the displacement is doubled. /QUOTE]

Could you check the values you've posted here? You're saying that the frequency was reduced from 1.24 kHz to 2.64 Hz? Is this second frequency correct?
 
yeah the problem is stated that way which is why i think i keep getting the wrong answer.
 
You still haven't shown how you actually did the calculation or what the answer is claimed to be. The equation you have is for the power of a wave (I presume the 'p' represents density of the medium); since the distance is kept fixed, the intensity will change in the same proportion as the power. With both the amplitude and the frequency doubled, the power of the wave and the intensity at the specific distance should quadruple.
 
dynamicsolo said:
With both the amplitude and the frequency doubled, the power of the wave and the intensity at the specific distance should quadruple.

Well, that's teach me to write some of these comments too late at night. Doubling each of those two factors will increase the power (and intensity at fixed distance) by a factor of 4, so doubling both will give an increase by a factor of 16.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top